DPP to file appeal in Pattni’s Sh5.8bn case

Pattni and five others were accused of conspiring to steal Sh5.8 billion between April 19 and 29, 1993 from the Paymaster General’s account held at Central Bank of Kenya/FILE

NAIROBI, Kenya, Apr 10 – The Director of Public Prosecutions will now appeal a High Court decision that terminated the Sh5.8 billion Goldenberg criminal case against businessman Kamlesh Pattni.

In a letter addressed to the Deputy Registrar of the Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the court, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions James Warui is seeking to be provided with all the case proceedings.

“We hereby apply to be furnished with typed and certified proceedings for purposes of filing an appeal against the decision of Justice (Joseph) Mutava on March 25, 2013,” the letter states stressing urgency from the registry.

Commercial division judge Mutava invalidated the criminal proceedings against Pattni after the businessman moved to the High Court to contest the criminal charges which were preferred against him more than eight years ago.

Pattni and five others were accused of conspiring to steal Sh5.8 billion between April 19 and 29, 1993 from the Paymaster General’s account held at Central Bank of Kenya.

Former Kenya Commercial Bank General Manager Elijah arap Bii and Wilfred Karuga Koinange who was then Permanent Secretary at The Treasury were separately accused of breach of trust by causing the said amount to be paid to Pattni’s firm, Goldenberg International.

Pattni had moved to the High Court arguing that he was not likely to get a fair hearing as three of his co-accused had passed on.

His co-accused who have since died are Wilfred Koinange, former spy chief James Kanyotu and former Deputy Governor Eliphaz Riungu.

In January 2012, DPP Keriako Tobiko rejected a plea-bargain proposal by Pattni over the Goldenberg scandal and ordered the case to proceed to full trial.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Tobiko said that the plea failed to meet any specific proposal to warrant his consideration and insisted that request was a mere attempt to show why the businessman should not have been charged.